gun discharge in cockpit.

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in
m:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dan wrote in
:

On Mar 31, 5:22 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

But it does define death. The wold is a more violent place almost
everywhere these days. Lots of things are contributing, but there
is no question about it, the availability of guns in the US is --
unquestionably -- responsible for the staggering murder rate
which is unequalled amongst "first world" nations. If you guys and
the NRA are so interesed in responsible gun wonership, then you
should be supporting restrictions on ownership, not opposing them.

Bertie
That statement is absolutely, positively, and profoundly false.

There are many countries with gun ownership rates similar to or
higher than the US, yet those have very low murder rates. The
reverse is also true.

Finland, Switzerland, and New Zealand have virtually identical gun
ownership rates to the US, and yet their murder rates are
significantly lower than those of surrounding countries.

That's because everyone in Switzerland and Finland are military
reserve. They don't own the guns, the state does.
There's no evidence that murder rates are higher in those countries
with higher levels of gun ownership. The only way to show such
relationships is cherry picking a few countries to make the
comparison.

Israel, with the highest gun ownership rate in the world, has a
murder rate 40% below Canada's.
Again, the military.....

So if the gun in my house were owned by the government instead of me
it would some how know that and not allow itself to shoot someone it
wasn't supposed to?

Really, how's that work?


Well, in Switzerland and Finland, the two examples you gave, military
service is mandatory. A year, or two, can't remember which. ( I know
several Swiss well and get to Helsinki fairly often so I can ask when
I;m there) When you get out, you are on reserve for life. The gun laws
in both places are much stricter than anything proposed in the US,
BTW...

They don't buy guns as toys, they have them as part of a national
defense plan.

And your argument is bull**** and you know it.


Bertie


USAian firearms are part of our national defense plan as well. (See 2nd
Amendment to the Constitution)

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in
m:

Flydive wrote:

So, by this you mean that is not guns that are dangerous, but the
American population? Well then maybe it would be a good idea to ban
guns over there........
Unfortunately yes it is the American population that is the problem.
And we've tried gun localized gun bans and they don't work. These
people that break the law have a bad habit of ignoring gun laws as
well.



As do the people that sell them to them as well as the distrubitors and
manufacturers.



Bertie

Bertie, I know you like to take a knee jerk position on just about any
issue that comes up but please don't just repeat back the the
anti-firearms propaganda that was only thought up as a way of using the
tort laws as a way of attacking the US firearms industry. It is beneath you.

On Apr 1, 9:04 am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:
Dan wrote:
On Mar 31, 5:47 pm, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:
Dan wrote:
On Mar 31, 4:51 pm, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:
Google Miami FBI Shootout
Don't need to.
Are you involved in containing/stopping heavily armed bank robbers? If
so, you need to be equally armed.
But if you are a private citizen, you will probably end up in jail if
you try to STOP fleeing robbers.
Dan Mc
The point was that after the FBI put a god awful number of wounds into
those suspects (who for the most part were armed with Mini-14s) was that
the 9mm didn't have the stopping power to deal with a suspect even if
all they were hyped up on was adrenaline.

There is a reason that the US Army SF, FBI Hostage Rescue and pretty
much all major SWAT teams have switched to either the .45 or .40.

Right -- and they (all of the above) are looking for people.

YOU as a citizen are not out hunting them -- you're doing your best to
avoid a confrontation but if forced, use deadly force.

Not the same situation.

Dan Mc

Actually the fact that they are looking for targets is an argument for
the use of a firearm with the most rounds. Yet they choose the full size
firearm with the less.

Not really. SpecOps, SF etc use handguns as backup.

They also enter & clear in teams.

And they practice a whole lot more than the rest of us with free ammo.

Dan Mc

On 2008-03-31, Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:
I know you think IPSC shooting is a game and has little to do with the
real world but it's power factor system is as good as any of calculating
the force projected on target.

9mm = 135 gr @ 1100 fps = 135,300
.40 S&W = 165 gr @ 980 fps = 161,700
.45acp = 230 gr @ 900 fps = 207,000

Hmm, that is just 'gr' x 'fps' (except for the 9mm which seems wrong).

This analysis is flawed. Kinetic energy isn't just mass x velocity.
K = 0.5 mv ^ 2

(where K is the kinetic energy, m is mass in kilograms, and v is velocity in
m/s).

So converting to SI so we can calculate the kinetic energy:
9mm = 8.75 grams at 335 m/s
..40 = 10.7 grams at 299 m/s
..45 = 15 grams at 274 m/s

Which results in:
9mm = 491 joules
..40 = 478 joules
..45 = 563 joules

So while the .45 has the most kinetic energy, the 9mm actually beats the
..40 when the calculations are done according to the laws of physics.

So I'd argue its power factor isn't any good at all since it's based on
a fundamentally flawed calculation. I won't disagree that there may be
other factors when considering the effectiveness of a round, but just
multiplying mass by velocity is so wrong it's not even wrong.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

On Apr 1, 9:34 am, Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2008-03-31, Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:

I know you think IPSC shooting is a game and has little to do with the
real world but it's power factor system is as good as any of calculating
the force projected on target.

9mm = 135 gr @ 1100 fps = 135,300
.40 S&W = 165 gr @ 980 fps = 161,700
.45acp = 230 gr @ 900 fps = 207,000

Hmm, that is just 'gr' x 'fps' (except for the 9mm which seems wrong).

This analysis is flawed. Kinetic energy isn't just mass x velocity.
K = 0.5 mv ^ 2

(where K is the kinetic energy, m is mass in kilograms, and v is velocity in
m/s).

So converting to SI so we can calculate the kinetic energy:
9mm = 8.75 grams at 335 m/s
.40 = 10.7 grams at 299 m/s
.45 = 15 grams at 274 m/s

Which results in:
9mm = 491 joules
.40 = 478 joules
.45 = 563 joules

So while the .45 has the most kinetic energy, the 9mm actually beats the
.40 when the calculations are done according to the laws of physics.

So I'd argue its power factor isn't any good at all since it's based on
a fundamentally flawed calculation. I won't disagree that there may be
other factors when considering the effectiveness of a round, but just
multiplying mass by velocity is so wrong it's not even wrong.

Typo in there?

This analysis is flawed. Kinetic energy isn't just mass x velocity.
K = 0.5 mv ^ 2

I thought Kinetic energy = 1/2 x (mass x velocity squared)...?

Dan Mc

On 2008-03-29, Dan wrote:
The fact is that the impact of a 9mm bullet --at muzzle velocity -- is
equal to a *one pound* weight dropped from a height of 5.96 feet
(achieving a velocity of 19.6 fps) or a ten pound weight dropped from
a height of 0.72 inches (yes, that's 3/4 of an inch!)

What size of 1lb weight?

It depends on the density of that 1 lb weight. If that weight was
one micron cubed, it would probably go all the way to the centre of
the earth. But 1lb of duck feathers wouldn't even hurt you at that
velocity.

A 1lb weight travelling at 19.6 fps, or in proper units, a 0.455
kilogram weight travelling at 6 metres per second has twenty times the
kinetic energy of a .45 round (around 8 kilojoules, versus the .45's
kinetic energy of about 0.5 kilojoules).

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

On Apr 1, 9:34 am, Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2008-03-31, Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:

I know you think IPSC shooting is a game and has little to do with the
real world but it's power factor system is as good as any of calculating
the force projected on target.

9mm = 135 gr @ 1100 fps = 135,300
.40 S&W = 165 gr @ 980 fps = 161,700
.45acp = 230 gr @ 900 fps = 207,000

Hmm, that is just 'gr' x 'fps' (except for the 9mm which seems wrong).

This analysis is flawed. Kinetic energy isn't just mass x velocity.
K = 0.5 mv ^ 2

(where K is the kinetic energy, m is mass in kilograms, and v is velocity in
m/s).

So converting to SI so we can calculate the kinetic energy:
9mm = 8.75 grams at 335 m/s
.40 = 10.7 grams at 299 m/s
.45 = 15 grams at 274 m/s

Which results in:
9mm = 491 joules
.40 = 478 joules
.45 = 563 joules

So while the .45 has the most kinetic energy, the 9mm actually beats the
.40 when the calculations are done according to the laws of physics.

KE is not universally accepted as the measure of bullet effectiveness,
but it is an interesting data point.

On 2008-04-01, Dan wrote:
This analysis is flawed. Kinetic energy isn't just mass x velocity.
K = 0.5 mv ^ 2

I thought Kinetic energy = 1/2 x (mass x velocity squared)...?

0.5 is the same as 1/2.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

On 2008-04-01, Dan wrote:
KE is not universally accepted as the measure of bullet effectiveness,
but it is an interesting data point.

Yes, I understand that - what I was alluding to was the original
calculation which was just mass * velocity was pretty much totally
useless in indicating anything in particular, other than mass * velocity
equals some number. To come up with a good definition of 'stopping
power', kinetic energy would make a far better starting point than a
naive calculation of simple mass times velocity.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2008-03-31, Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:
I know you think IPSC shooting is a game and has little to do with the
real world but it's power factor system is as good as any of calculating
the force projected on target.

9mm = 135 gr @ 1100 fps = 135,300
.40 S&W = 165 gr @ 980 fps = 161,700
.45acp = 230 gr @ 900 fps = 207,000

Hmm, that is just 'gr' x 'fps' (except for the 9mm which seems wrong).

This analysis is flawed. Kinetic energy isn't just mass x velocity.
K = 0.5 mv ^ 2

(where K is the kinetic energy, m is mass in kilograms, and v is velocity in
m/s).

So converting to SI so we can calculate the kinetic energy:
9mm = 8.75 grams at 335 m/s
.40 = 10.7 grams at 299 m/s
.45 = 15 grams at 274 m/s

Which results in:
9mm = 491 joules
.40 = 478 joules
.45 = 563 joules

So while the .45 has the most kinetic energy, the 9mm actually beats the
.40 when the calculations are done according to the laws of physics.

So I'd argue its power factor isn't any good at all since it's based on
a fundamentally flawed calculation. I won't disagree that there may be
other factors when considering the effectiveness of a round, but just
multiplying mass by velocity is so wrong it's not even wrong.


You're right I typed 1100 when I should have typed 1000 for the 9mm. The
power factor simplifies the equation by removing the 0.5 and ^2.

You are also right that there is another factor in stopping power and it
is the energy that is actually left in the target. A round that
penetrates and keeps on going has obviously NOT imparted all of it's
energy into the target. One that stops in the target obviously has done so.

This is why hollow points beat FMJ and .45 beats 9mm. It's all about
energy transfer.

Here's a little ammo trivia. The .40 S&W was a compromise round. Smith
and Wesson wanted a 10mm round but still wanted to be able to use their
9mm frame tooling.

Also, there is no technical reason the 9mm couldn't have been beefed up
to near .45 specs. The .38 Super +P almost does it. The problem was the
legacy 9mm guns out there that couldn't deal with the added pressure and
unless they made a radical change to the case. Then of course there is
the marketing side that clearly states that a 4 is bigger and better
than a 3 and a 10 is bigger and better than a 10. And further that an
increase from 9 to 10 is only an increase of 1 and change from .38 to
..40 is an increase of 2.

Also note that a lot of the really Elite units are moving away from 9mm
in their SMGs and going to .40 S&W.